[lbo-talk] Note of thanks

[ravi]

On Apr 9, 2009, at 9:59 AM, Chris Doss wrote:
>
> Personally I think that the idea that Heidegger could replace Marx,  
> or anybody doing history/sociology/political economy, is silly. They  
> were concerned with totally different questions and operated on  
> different planes. It would be like replacing Newton with Freud.
>

I am not sure where you are going with this analogy... Newton's work  
was empirically and mathematically grounded science (whatever his  
other beliefs might have been). Freud and Marx (at least in some  
versions) [thought they] were inventing a new science... whether they  
are a science remains to be seen, IMHO. Heidegger (of whom you know a  
lot more than I do) seems to have been concerned with separating  
thinking (a profoundly human activity) and science.

	--ravi

P.S: given all my prior rants about "science", I should clarify that I  
am using "science" here in the traditional sense.

--
Support something better than yourself ;-)
PeTA       => http://peta.org/
Greenpeace => http://greenpeace.org/
If you have nothing better to read: http://platosbeard.org/